Ambient air pollution exposure and damage to male gametes: human studies and<i>in situ</i>‘sentinel’ animal experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally there is concern that adverse reproductive outcomes and fertility impairment in humans may be caused by exposure to environmental contaminants. Air pollution in particular has been linked to DNA damage, abnormal sperm morphology, and reduced sperm performance in men. Experimental studies using model species (mice and rats) exposed in situ provide evidence that ambient air pollution can cause damage to the respiratory system and other tissues or organs. This can take the form of DNA damage and other genetic changes throughout the body, including induced mutations, DNA strand breaks, and altered methylation patterns in male germ cells. Human and animal studies together provide strong evidence that air pollution, especially airborne particulate matter, at commonly occurring ambient levels is genotoxic to male germ cells. The mechanistic link between air pollution exposure and induced genetic changes in male germ cells is currently unclear. 'Sentinel' animal experiments explicitly examining air pollution affects on sperm quality in laboratory rodents have not been conducted and would provide a critical link to observations in humans. The importance of air pollution compared to other factors affecting fertility and reproductive outcomes in humans is not clear and warrants further investigation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".